Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by jagzz

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Smells like hoax.

Not to mention, the laughable claim that physics would be different in another solar system really hurts the overall credibility.

How on Earth could you possibly know or understand how physics would operate in another solar system, if you are going to go on a website like this you need to open your mind to different possibilities.

How much a given physical model can be reduced is what is in question here. Kepler's Law is a specialized, simplified reduction of Newton's Laws for a single central attractor acting on an orbiting body. The only argument here is that when you throw two central attractors within the model you must step back to the more general Newtonian laws, and not try to apply the simplified situation of Kepler's Law.

BUT, the PHYSICS still remain the same.

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree, physics are the same unless our understanding of them is wrong... which very well could be the case. There are so many different star systems that can all give us more information on how the universe works.

Another point that should be made is that "Anonymous" does not seem to be well versed in scientific means. I think its safe to assume that he/she could very well be a pencil pusher in the government. Lets not rule out the possibility that he may not be using the correct terms for certain things. After all, according to his story he is just thumbing thru this book. He has even stated that he does not have the ability to explain some of the more scientific things in this book.

Eitherway the statement "physics in the Eben solar system are not the same" can not disprove the claims made on this site.

Originally posted by noise


Another point that should be made is that "Anonymous" does not seem to be well versed in scientific means. I think its safe to assume that he/she could very well be a pencil pusher in the government. Lets not rule out the possibility that he may not be using the correct terms for certain things. After all, according to his story he is just thumbing thru this book. He has even stated that he does not have the ability to explain some of the more scientific things in this book.

These statements here I absolutely agree with and have considered. If there's anything worth considering in this whole saga, its veracity shouldn't be determined based on whether Anonymous can technically talk about what he claims to be passing on from these documents.

P.S. And one more very important thing to keep in mind is that Mr. Anonymous might be the one the horrible hoax is being played on most. He may be a very honest, well-intentioned person who is having a terrible terrible thing happen to him by being led to believe the documents are genuine, when they're nothing but horse-crap.

Well....

I just spent the entire morning reading Anon's posts and reviewing what people have written here.

I think it's possible that it may be real information buried within an easy to 'digest' story. The point may be to expose the public to real information... but to do so in a way that sounds so fantastic that it isn't scary.

My observations:
1. someone, above, stated that it was inconsistent for the government to have access to alien documentation for several years and yet not have a perfect (or highly reliable) understanding of the Eben language prior to the exchange program. They also pointed out that, with estimated IQs of 165, that the Ebens should have had an easy time grasping English. The problem with this thinking, though, is that language is not like physics or chemistry. Though any individual language has its own rules, there is no reason to suppose that there are 'universal' rules that apply to every language in the galaxy. Many of our own linguistic habits/rules, it is believed, are actually hard-wired into our brains at birth (as Noam Chomsky has argued for decades). This hardwiring predisposes us to process language in certain ways.

So... though both sides may have been intelligent... it would have been very difficult to understand the other side's language... as an Eben translator, for example, would not have the same neurological structures as the human he was talking to. In other words... things that might 'come easy' to one group would not be the same way with the other.

Another thing that has to be remembered is that it's difficult to learn a language without visual cues. Prior to person to person contact, it may have been impossible to learn certain things about the Eben language.

Oh... and spanish is in the Indo-European family of languages. The two are only separated by a few thousand years... and English has many loan words from latin. So just because a kid can learn spanish in a few years doesn't mean it's absurd to think that a person can only learn 50% of an alien language after 14 years.

2.My impression wasn't that the aliens didn't have a sense of 'time', but that they had a sense of time that was understood in relation to the position of their sun(s). Technically, this is how we process time as well.

It may just have been that there were aspects of the eben concept of 'time' that the humans didn't perceive or understand (or vice versa). It's not an inconsistency to point out that the Ebens didn't understand our time at the same time that they managed to land 'on time'. While arranging the meeting, the government may have just said, "Land when our planet is in position X in relation to these other planets in our system."

3.Little things (like the inability of the Ebens to understand that a ball had to be caught before hitting the ground) abound in these posts that make them seem real. You see.... a real alien might not be able to understand many of the non-intellectual things that humans do. This is because many of the things we do are either hard-wired into us or were developed for specific reasons in our ancient past. Playing 'catch', for instance, might not make sense to aliens.

4.The claim that physics might be different within a system sounds absurd... but we have to keep in mind things like the so-called 'Pioneer Anomaly'. There are several threads on ats about it but, for those who dodn't know, NASA has observed that probes at the edge of the solar system don't move the way they are supposed to (at least according to our understanding of gravitation). It may be that the 'laws' of physics are slightly different around each individual star.... and so a set of alternate laws is only observed once the star system in question has been traversed.

my thoughts exactly only.


I feel that people are looking at the documentation in terms of our own existance rather than thinking about the actual endless possiblities and combinations that could exist outside our own civilization.

Profile of Anonymous V0.1

Perhaps it would be helpful to start developing a profile of what we can learn of Anonymous and his cohorts. By doing so, we may get a better sense of how to perceive and evaluate the information we're receiving. Please feel free to comment on my suggested profile with supporting or contradictory information.

By developing this profile, we should be better able to understand both the actual information we receive, as well as the manner in which it is conveyed. This is important, because I think many of the comments here (both supporting and skeptical) are viewing Anonmyous' comments as though he were reporting from first-hand knowledge and with an complete understanding of each matter of which he speaks. I don't think this is the case. Understanding the message and the messenger, however, should help us sort through what he's saying, to make a more accurate determination of whether there is any truth to this.

Hypothesis: Anonymous was a mid-level government employee involved with a highly classified project, but is reporting from source materials he believes to be authentic. He does not have first-hand knowledge nor expertise on the many "facts" he is communicating. Anon was not directly involved with Project Serpo, thus when reading Anon's posts, expect that the facts are laced with Anon's interpretation what he is learning from the source material.

Supporting Statements:

Now consider this: Even though each Team Member was taught the Eben tonal sounds/language, it was difficult for the Team Members to remember each tone and the use of other sounds with the tones. The two linguists on the Team practiced and learned enough to basically communicate, according to the documents I read. Posting 10, December 2, 2005

Two important things here. First, he introduces his statement with "Now consider this". This is indicative of a statement of conjecture or explanation. Coupled with "according to the documents I've read", Anonymous is telling us that he digested numerous sources of material and is interpreting what he's learned. Thus, we know that he(nor did any of his alleged colleagues) did not have first-hand knowledge of this aspect of the project; and we know that he's giving us his interpretation of what he read -- like with any attempt to summarize or paraphrase laced with conjecture, the form of the message is going to be questionable to some.

next,

Somehow, I never knew this information, but a meeting date was set for April 1964 near Alamogordo New Mexico. The Aliens landed and retrieved the bodies of their dead comrades. Information was exchanged. Communication was in English. The aliens had a translation device. Anonymous' Original Posting -- Undated

Again, we learn a few more things here. First, he did not have first-hand knowledge of the supposed 1964 "meeting". Indicative, once again, that this project was compartmentalized and Anon was not at the highest level of management of the project, otherwise he would have known of the meeting. Note that this means that he was not at the highest level -- that doesn't mean he wasn't highly placed. Such a meeting would have been on a need to know basis.

Second, we learn that the information about the information exchange at the meeting, the translator, etc., is all second-hand information we're getting from Anon. He states these as facts, but they are only the facts as set forth in his source material. Thus, we're not testing Anon's credibility and veracity, it's his source material we have to question. As was suggested, we don't know whether Anon is, necessarily, the hoaxster. He may just be the messenger.

Finally, he drops a bombshell that I'm surprised has gone overlooked...

I have never seen or read anything about the exchange program. I once heard a little bit of information from Linda Howe, but she didn't have much information. Original Posting -- Undated

The Exchange program is the primary topic of this thread, thus far, since the vast majority of Anon's remaining posts deal with the subject an alleged exchange of people between a civilization called the Eben and our own. On that basis, we must assume that all of the information that Anon is providing us is based solely on his "collegues" and source material which, as I understand it, comprises a 3,000+ page debriefing manual. I find it odd that an ultra-highly classified and compartmentalized project's documentation were conveniently collected into a single source, but that's how I'm reading between the lines of Anon's posts.

Summary and Conclusion: It follows from this that 1) we have a source with little to no first-hand knowledge of the project about which he speaks; and 2) we are allegedly learning facts that have been paraphrased, summarized, interpreted, and communicated from a debriefing manual which supposedly exists and contains the complete and unabridged account of Project Serpo, as translated and conveyed via Anonymous.

If this is not starting to sound incredible, please also consider that this is not being done by a single person. Anonymous claims that he has accomplices... er.. colleagues.

My colleagues and I are discussing several different options regarding the release of this information. First, we must obtain proper sanction from past officials. Posting 5, November 13, 2005

In fact, not only does anonymous have colleagues, but these colleagues are going to get official "sanction from past officials". Sanctioned for what? The authorized released of classified information? Wouldn't it be necessary for present officials to declassify the information and then release it publicaly? But Anonymous tantalizes us further with,

Many have died, but we still have a few around. We are asking their approval for release. Next, we must obtain current official sanction. This may be a little more difficult. Current DIA officials have very little knowledge of this subject matter. However, we will move ahead with our plans. Our main supporter is _____ ______ ______ , a former director of __________. He is in our corner and will support our gradual release plan. id.

Ah... they're also going to get current official sanction. Again, though, what about declassification? The President could not "sanction" the release of this information, but perhaps Anonymous is merely suggested that through their unnamed main support they can gradually release certain information.

These are details that do not makes sense to me, if I am to place credibility in either the source or the source material. It's equally as likely, to me at this point, that Anonymous is an unwitting goat in giving credibility to another set of "MJ-12" documents, as it is likely that Anonymous came into possession of the "holy grail" of disclosure documents and is assuring us in an understated manner that disclosure is coming.

Everyone needs to digest this information and come to their own conclusion, but I feel as though we are again at the brink of another MJ-12 document type of situation. Very likely, Anonymous will turn out to be merely the messenger for another set of documents of dubious reliability. And that's the best case scenario. Another possibility is that Anon is simply lying -- we'll know that if he is unable or unwilling to release the documents he purports to have for public inspection.

[edit on 3-12-2005 by Centrist]

Centrist,
Those are all good observations... but they're based on the assumption that everything Anon was well-edited. For instance, you pointed out that Anon said that he had never seen or read anything about the exchange program, but I think what he was trying to say was that he had never read anything in the media about it.

You see... we're all trying to find slip-ups or hints in his comments... but, as in the real world, people don't always convey everything they are thinking while writing. Some things go unsaid (because the author assumes the reader can infer them), some things are only understood in context (meaning that a sentence has to be understood in relation to the discussion it is buried in), and some things are simply said the wrong way because of errors.

It seems like, on ATS, people often debunk things based entirely on what they see as inconsistencies in the writing of any source document itself. The problem with this is that such a critique rides on the notion that everything a person is saying is 1)The totality of what they are saying (no parts left unsaid) 2)Literally true, down to the last detail, instead of being figuratively true or 'true' in the sense that a broad summary is true if not technically accurate and 3) Perfectly written (without errors).

In real life, people use 'shorthand' when speaking or writing all the time. Few conversations are not carried out where a large amount of the information is not implied or sensed without being stated directly. The same goes for any government 'leak'... just because something seems contradictory because it was written that way (if someone is reading something in a very literal, robotic way) does not mean that it is automatically debunked. After all... I think we all know that I wasn't talking about people cutting their hands off at the top of this paragraph... so it goes without saying that most of you knew what I was talking about when I mentioned 'shorthand'.

The way text is debunked here (and elsewhere) reminds me of the hostile cross-examinations that are seen in courtrooms. Often a lawyer will find something 'wrong' or contradictory in an honest witnesses testimony... because, based on how it was worded, it seemed contradictory when it was only just worded the wrong way. At that point the witness usually tosses his hands in the air and says, "You know what I mean" and things move on. Here, in the conspiracy world, though, there is no common consensus in regards to what someone means. For instance, many of the contradictions people have spotted in the John Titor story may simply have been writing errors.

So... am I saying that this is real? Not necessarily. What I am saying, though, is that text that seems to contradict itself may not point to a hoax... simply because people routinely use language that is not precise.

Thanks for your comments. I agree with you completely, with regard to the substance of what you wrote. With regard to the interpretation of some of what Anon wrote, I think your interpretations are equally valid to mine -- maybe Anon was writing in a "you know what I mean" way. But given the extraordinary nature of his claims, I don't think it's unreasonable to pick-apart the message to see if it unintentionally contained clues to information that would help sort it out.

So... am I saying that this is real? Not necessarily. What I am saying, though, is that text that seems to contradict itself may not point to a hoax... simply because people routinely use language that is not precise.

Agreed. But please understand that I'm not trying to assess the validity of anything that Anon is reporting. I'm simply trying to understand what we're being told (and probably accepting more at face value than I personally believe). I still think that the way Anon is writing, it's clear that he his primarily regurgitating information from a book. I do not think that he's necessarily trying to "twist" the information, but as the old saying goes "something got lost in translation" -- that may help us determine which inconsistencies in his facts and text may be harmless and which may be the harbingers of the ultimate truth of the information we're being presented with.

You bring up a good point(s)...

Things being taken out of context happens all the time and is used as a weapon in the media. A very effective weapon considering how lazy most of us are that we hear the "phony" (taken out of context) statement and won't go look to see if it is the genuine intent of the person who said it.

I think debunking based soley on the content of the written or recorded testimony of the author or witness is just as flawed as believing something 100% with zero verification.

As you pointed out, it's very easy to type something that, in your mind means "X" when you typed it, but the people who read it will understand it to mean "Y". This is another form of taking things out of context. It gets more complicated when all you have is written word.

Without the benefit of vocal inflection, body language, looking someone straight in the eye, etc... It's very easy for the actual message or point to be lost or misconstrued in the "translation"...

Anon is, IMHO, attempting to tell a story about a series of events that happened some 30 odd years ago by reading through the documentation of those events. (Obviously that statement is based on my suspense of disbelief )

Much can be misconstrued/taken out of context by him and by the readers of re-telling.

That being said, I think it's a worthwhile effort to try to get a handle on what Anon's background and more importantly, motivation is. It would go a long way toward forgiving obvious mistakes and bad science if we knew his training was in Nursing, for example, and not physics wouldn't it?

I guess my point is, I agree with you completely that we need to focus on the "story" alot more than how it's being told or the minutia of small errors in facts.

Springer...

Does anybody have any theories on how this could be possible?

Anonymous says:

Between the first message sent by our Earth-based team in the summer of 1952 to the first message received from the Ebens was about four months. We have no way of knowning when the Ebens received our message, how long it took them to study it and how long it took them to send it back.

Roundtrip communication cycle completes in 4 months. Serpo is 37 light years away.

Man I'm gone for a year and come back to see this stuff pop up. Lot of weird stuff with this story that ties in with other stories:

Close Encounters: tonal language, and 12 member team (how many in CE were standing there before Dryfus got picked?)

Socorro: Wow nice tie in with that sighting eh? I thought I could throw this whole thing out since there was no way 12 people could fit with their gear in what Zamora saw land earlier...but then no exchange supposedly happened till the next year.

George Norry...hasn't he been saying that there were 3 people that wanted to come forward with information?

My doubts stem from:
1) Funny that I didn't read anything tying into this in the "Disclosure" book.

2) 19. Other training which is still considered extremely highly classified even after 40 years [1965 - 2005] What's the big secret here? Why can Anon talk about aliens but not about training? Is this a catch all to deflect in-depth questions?

3) How could they not translate numbers when EBE-1 (Obi-wan?) was teaching them?

4) Carl Sagan? (ugh...this is just a gut feeling, but his name popping up just seems like a warning to me)

To me too much just ties in with the "UFO folklore" that exists. A little is taken from here and a little from there and we cut and paste it together and come up with something new that still sounds familiar. I don't know if you can totally erase 12 people's lives (class photos with them in there, graduation announcements, family members asking "hey where did my kid go?"). It would of been easier to just say they died doing military "stuff"...which I'm sure Anon is going to say in one of his future posts.

Anyway the story is good fun right now, so with child-like hope...I'll continue reading.

Originally posted by Valhall
Does anybody have any theories on how this could be possible?

Anonymous says:

Between the first message sent by our Earth-based team in the summer of 1952 to the first message received from the Ebens was about four months. We have no way of knowning when the Ebens received our message, how long it took them to study it and how long it took them to send it back.

Roundtrip communication cycle completes in 4 months. Serpo is 37 light years away.

To give some scifi sounding answers:

1. It's reasonable to assume that any communication system a group or race has is at least as fast -- and probably much faster -- than the top speed of any vehicle they might have. It wouldn't, for instance, make much sense to use a telephone that sends signals at only 500mph in an age of commercial jets (for ambassadors, at least).

So, if it is taken as granted -- for the sake of argument -- that the aliens can travel faster than the speed of light... it should also be assumed that any communication device they have sends signals out at a speed that is faster than the speed of light.

2.Quantum 'coupling'. My physics is rusty, but if I remember correctly quantum physics has shown that a particle in location A can simultaneously influence a particle in location B IF they have become 'entangled'. This, in effect, would provide for faster than light communication if these molecules could be influenced in such a way that information could be carried through them. Now... they may have to originate from the same source, which wouldn't be a problem for a receiver and transmitter that were built on the same planet.

If my physics is shotty... I'm sure someone will explain quantum coupling better.

3. The transmitter could broadcast something like theoretical 'tachyons'.


[edit on 3-12-2005 by onlyinmydreams]

Thanks, OIMD! I'll dwell on that a bit more.

Boogie - good points. But I think the following...

Originally posted by Boogie

To me too much just ties in with the "UFO folklore" that exists. A little is taken from here and a little from there and we cut and paste it together and come up with something new that still sounds familiar. I don't know if you can totally erase 12 people's lives (class photos with them in there, graduation announcements, family members asking "hey where did my kid go?"). It would of been easier to just say they died doing military "stuff"...which I'm sure Anon is going to say in one of his future posts.

Is one of those instances where you are taking the words to literally and not allowing for implied meaning. I do not believe he said they went back and tried to erase these 12 people's former lives. What he said is they purged the system of military records and government records (tax forms, social security numbers, etc.) and medical records. I assumed the minute I read that that the medical records they were referring to were isolated to the period of time the 12 were in military service. I never thought he meant they went and demanded and destroyed their civilian medical records prior to military service.


[edit on 12-3-2005 by Valhall]

Originally posted by Valhall
Does anybody have any theories on how this could be possible?

Anonymous says:

Between the first message sent by our Earth-based team in the summer of 1952 to the first message received from the Ebens was about four months. We have no way of knowning when the Ebens received our message, how long it took them to study it and how long it took them to send it back.

Roundtrip communication cycle completes in 4 months. Serpo is 37 light years away.

The simple explaination is that Anon is lying or Anon knows so little about science that he/she can't tell when their sources are lying.

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Valhall
Does anybody have any theories on how this could be possible?

Anonymous says:

Between the first message sent by our Earth-based team in the summer of 1952 to the first message received from the Ebens was about four months. We have no way of knowning when the Ebens received our message, how long it took them to study it and how long it took them to send it back.

Roundtrip communication cycle completes in 4 months. Serpo is 37 light years away.

The simple explaination is that Anon is lying or Anon knows so little about science that he/she can't tell when their sources are lying.

But I;m sure you're aware of the recent experiments wherein 'information' was teleported between molecules. I'm sure I'm missing a scientific point here... but don't some aspects of quantum physics allow for instantaneous communication?

The device the government used to communicate from the aliens was from their ship... we didn't build it (at least according to Anon's story).

Also... we have to remember that the time issue may have more to do with whatever debate the aliens had among themselves. If, for instance, they instantly received our message they may have taken four months to mull over what their next move was going to be.

While the serpo.org site wasn't really that specific on the specifications and capabilities of the Eben technology consider this: If they have mastered some sort of space-time compression technique, they could use regular radio waves which propagate at the speed of light but have a greatly reduced distance to travel due to the compressed space time. I believe Bob Lazar tried to explain something like this in "The Real Physics of Star Trek".

I am still skeptical of Anonymous' posts but I am just trying to figure out how the Eben technology MIGHT be possible. I also like the above theories.

This is great fictional story. Perhaps a BOOK. I love reading the post from this story. Youngones reading this story just remember it is just a made up story. Anyways anyone who may have had this info probable would not get past accesses to the internet. Love the posters name.

[edit on 3-12-2005 by Truthforall]